Of course, you get a skater like Kaetlyn Osmond, that has CLEARLY paid attention to the components aspect - she's a strong performer, competes technically challenging choreography loaded with transitions and actually has solid interpretation skills (her skating skills are below the top senior skaters, imo). And she's been rewarded for it with PCS.

So it's weird to hear so much made in the way of excuses for the jumping beans with regards to PCS - as if because they're young, it's beyond their power to improve this aspect of the sport; as if the judges are inherently wrong to say they have poor choreography because they land the jumps.

Kaetlyn is a nice exception. Being so new on the scene, I for sure thought that she would be held back this entire season by the judges. She's lucky to have had home ice in SC, and Nebelhorn, she had to win because her competitors couldn't match her technically.

The judges aren't wrong by saying they have poor choreography, but they are creating a gap in something as subjective as artistry that it doesn't matter if one skater skates well and the other skates poorly... what if a junior skater lands all 7 triples and gets a 5.7 for Technical Merit, and because they're junior in their choreo/speed/performance gets a 5.1. Then you get a senior skater who steps out of 3 of her jumps and falls on one, lands only 2 triples and a double axel, and gets a 5.3 for Technical Merit but her artistry is better gets a 5.6 for presentation thus placing ahead of the younger skater?

The same is happening with this judging system. A top skater will automatically get 10-15 points higher PCS which is the equivalent of 3 or 4 triples... forget mistakes on her triples, the senior skater with said PCS advantage could omit 3 or 4 triples from her performance and it would still theoretically earn the same points as a younger skater who lands 7 triples.

This is totally wrong. I guess that's why the crowd at 2012 worlds in Nice was more than half empty (2000 persons, the worst attendance of the whole week for LPs) for dance and fully packed for ladies & men !
Ice dancing used to draw the most audiences all around the world under 6.0. Now it's only true for NA (guess why !).
Every team was interesting in their own way, the programs were very different and there was actually an interpretation even though the technical part wasn't as in your face and I agree the standart was less high (and even there, it depend what you're looking for, CDs quality has dropped dramatically since COP was introduced, no wonder why DomSha had easy time winning it in Vancouver).
Now we just have boring elements one after another, people doesn't have time left for interpretation (BroSoloviev and Weaver Poje FD from this season are great exemple of this : interpretation is only there the first and last 5 seconds of the FD, you can't know what was the idea behind those dance if you didn't learn it before seeing it ; not to mention D/W FD and V/M FD which could be skated to any just a bit dramatic piece, no story, no characters, nothing on the artistic side as it used to be seen) and just skate year after years the same routine with different music background (Belbin Agosto anyone ? Or Khokhlova Novitski). Even Pechalat Bourzat whom showed great promise on the artistic side at first sold themselves after 2008 to get more consistency. Now artistic mark is just another technical mark and judges can easily use it as they like to put who they want at the top.
Ice Dancing has no soul anymore. It's just the most boring event.

As for Ladies under this quad, I wonder why everybody wants to see baby girl jumping everywhere with no flow & basics and / or choreo (Gold and Tuktamisheva are great exemple of this). The final flight at Moscou worlds was a pure delight to watch and on a totally different level than was I've seen for years skating wise. Except the winner obviously. Even the russian (forgot her name) had a very good LP (Volozhinskaya, a huge thanks ! It shows what real choreographer are unlike Morozov) despite her less than stellar basics.

I agree and disagree. I agree with what you said about ice dance. I don't like the new programs. But the figure skating is a totally differente discipline. I agree with CanadianSkaterGuy, the technical elements is what makes the sport a sport in most people's eyes. And that is interesting, exciting to watch, and risky, of course.

Exactly. Last Olympics was a great example of how the skaters who were technically the best also happened to be the podium.

My fear is that next Olympics, we will get 7-triple skaters ending up in 4th or 5th because other 4 or 5 triple skaters with better programs but who make mistakes get the PCS to be placed ahead of them. Please let this not regress back to 2006 where a 5-triple performance wins -- although at least Shizuka had two lutzes and a flip. Kostner's performance at World's last year was lovely to watch, but as an Olympic gold medal worthy performance it was technically very subpar.

Well by that logic, shouldn't skaters with inferior jumps be compelled to improve their jump layout and consistency? Doesn't seem like they are if they can skate easier programs and make errors and still win.

It cuts both ways, and that's as it should be.

a) For example, To argue that Carolina Kostner or Mao Asada are not trying to improve their jump layout/consistency/difficulty is just false. Asada still aims for the 3A; Carolina Kostner reintroduced both the lutz and the flip after injury/surgery prevented her from training those regularly. Given Kostner's notorious inconsistency, I really can't believe you're trying to sell that her previous results haven't encouraged her to improve her consistency on the jumps.

b) But more than that, yes - Asada and Kostner won with lesser jump content than their rivals. By 0.04 points (NHK 2012) and 0.72 (Euros 2013). You think they're content narrowly beating skaters that had glaring flaws of their own. They barely beat skaters that for all intents and purposes omitted an entire element (both singled triple jumps. Had they been doubles, we'd be talking about Suzuki and Sotnikova as the winners).

Let's be honest too, while younger skaters don't possess the finesse of veteran skaters, they still have decent content in their programs, including transitions, and spins/footwork which are sometimes even harder than their senior counterparts. I can guarantee that if you counted up the transitions in junior skaters' programs and considered their difficulty, they would be on par with several senior skaters who are automatically getting a PCS transitions boost. PCS improvement will come over time. But as people have said, it's a sport. Artistic quality is part of it, but for people to take it seriously as a sport and not performance art there needs to be an emphasis on rewarding technical merit, which means good jumps. Should we say a younger skater should never be placed ahead of Kostner/Czisny/Asada/etc., even if the junior skater lands 3-3s and the seniors double all of their jumps?

a) Okay. Which skater do you feel had decent content in their programs that was overlooked in the PCS category? You can guarantee it, but can you demonstrate it?

b) Technical merit is not solely about jumps. Do you think Patrick Chan's footwork is less technically demanding than a triple toe?

c) You can't ask me to judge in a vacuum. Give me two skates that you feel should be compared, and then I'll tell you who should win (imo, of course).

The issue isn't that better skaters should be rewarded PCS-wise, it's whether they should be rewarded so much as to negate the technical aspect of the performance.

Again, the issue isn't about negating - indeed, viewing them diametrically asserts that. The issue is judging each fairly. By asserting that PCS should be judged as an adjunct to the jump-TES, you're fundamentally asking them to be judged unfairly.

At the time I thought Hicks should have won. After more reflective evaluation I think Wagner should have won -- and in fact, looking at the protocols, I cannot find anything to nit-pick with the judges about.

Courtney got TES 63.62, PCS 54.58

Ashley got TES 57.45, PCS 65.82, and won by 3.07 points. Courtney lost 3.2 points for singling her loop.

Here is what I think. Ashley skated the first half of her program like a world medal candidate. Except that she didn't do a triple-triple or a 2A-triple. In the second half she fell twice and double-footed another jump. Each of the two falls interrupted the performance in a major way. She had very good choreography and interpretation, with nice transitions as far as i am able to judge. She was fast, with variations in speed and intensity.

Her component scores were in the mid 8's for CH and INT, the low 8's for P&E, SS and Tr.

Courtney skated with speed, attack, and verve. Her choreography was spare and her presentation somewhat rough around the edges. Her component scores were low to mid 6's. She did not pick up much in the way of positive GOEs, except on her opening triple-triple.

She did 6 more-or-less clean triples and two double Axels. She did 3F+3T and 3Lz+2T. Her only mistake was on the 1Lo+2A SEQ.

^^ two problems.
One, Ashley would never get that kind of PCS in the real competition. For Courtney to skate as well as she did, I don't see any problem with her PCS.
Two, both of Ashley's jumps should have been downgraded. They gave her full credits.

Gracie could pull it off , Liza will go for the 3Lz-3T but her 3F isn't stable enough. However the point difference between 3L and 3F is insignificant. Adelina's 3Lz is a flutz and this combo isn't yet stable for her, plus she gets huge GOE on her 3T-3T to make up for the lower TES a bit. Still, a clean Yuna has the the TES advantage and the PCS anyway. But if others are clean also she might not be unreachable which is exciting!

Gold gets edge calls on her Flip Jumps rather consistently, so she almost always loses points there. Eliza's flip is better. They are both talented jumpers, but Eliza has better technique.

Sometimes Adelina manages a real flutz, but that jumps *is* a problem for her. Her landing positions/extension are glorious, though...

^^ two problems.
One, Ashley would never get that kind of PCS in the real competition. For Courtney to skate as well as she did, I don't see any problem with her PCS.
Two, both of Ashley's jumps should have been downgraded. They gave her full credits.

This. Her blade was literally sideways on those jumps, which is why she fell on both the lutz the loop. They were beyond UR, they were clearly short of being even called a triple at all. She gained valuable points by the technical caller NOT downgrading those jumps, which clearly should have been.

They have no excuse for that these days, since they have access to BETTER slow motion than we do (multiple angles, at a much higher resolution, I'm almost sure they have full professional Dartfish rigs there for that - or something equivalent).

Her flip still got an edge call for an obvious outside edge. It hasn't really improved, no. It's consistent, at least, which I guess is more important since she can design her programs knowing she'll get the call (like Wagner and her Flutz, she just doesn't do two of them since the edge call basically destroys all the +GOE you can get on the jump).

A lot can happen in a year. There is still time for the younger ladies to improve and I'm betting that they will step it up by Sochi. Gracie has time to work on her artistry. Wagner has time to increase her difficulty. Who knows? As far as the veterans are concerned, I don't see what is so great about Kostner besides her speed. I think she is highly overrated and obviously over-scored. She looks awkward and unsteady despite having nice edges. Mao needs the 3axel if she is going to come close to competing with a clean Yuna. I think this is the worst 4 years because many things are changing especially in the way the judges are scoring. I hope these kinks are worked out before Sochi because figure skating is teetering on the edge of oblivion with the casual fans who grow bored easily.

Her flip still got an edge call for an obvious outside edge. It hasn't really improved, no.

Actually, it has. Go look at the International B and it was a much more pronounced outside edge (and got worse GOE) compared to Nationals and is non-existent in practice now and has been something that has been worked on this year. Her practices in SLC at the International B are what it looked like at Nationals in her programs.

A big part of it really involves how both Mao and Carolina are so below their best capabilities. You know what they have done in the last and for both it is a spectacular collapse in jumping ability. And under IJS too! Their jumps spins and steps under IJS got them great Tes! And their pcs marks were good too. Now they rely on pcs and their Tes relies on spins and steps! Jumps are filler for both of them. They still want to be successful in competitions but use jumps as filler stuff now with seemingly no interest in even coming close to do what they used to do. That is Yuna is so great. She is coming back with basically the same jumps as when she left!

What an interesting discussion before Worlds, and what a reversal from the last two years! With Yuna back, Mao went from her rather lackluster early season performances to attempting an 8-triple long program and Carolina included a 3Lz and 3F+3T in her long program.

Technically, this was one of the strongest Worlds ladies podium in a while, I think. The rest of the top 10 were also very strong technically. It seems 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 will save this quad from being the "worst ladies quadrennial ever."